Would the countries that were neutral in WW2 have been invaded and taken over if Hitler had succedded in taking over the world? Or would he of respected their no sides approach?

~Chip (:-)

I think that Switzerland would have stayed neutral, because they have been in the middle of situations before where their neighbors were all at war and they stayed out of things. Also, it bears keeping in mind that Switzerland was surrounded by territory captured or annexed by Nazi Germany and remained staunchly neutral throughout the war. So long as they weren't attacked, I think that the Swiss would have stayed out of the fighting. Much the same could probably be said for the Swedes as well. Just a hunch!

The countries like Switzerland and Sweden that remained neutral were not in very strategically important areas for Hitler. He ignored Dutch and Norwegian neutrality and invaded them because they provided air bases for reaching England or a route into France. If Hitler had counquered Europe, I don't see how there would be any need to take over these neutral countries. He would dominate the European economy anyway, so in reality he would probably have de facto rule over these places without having to take them by force. Of course, we don't know how insane Hitler really was. If he was just bent on a German empire stretching across Europe, completely ruled and run by the Nazis, then he would probably have to take these areas too.

Glad to see the History Forum back in use. These discussions are always fun, even if they're just useless speculation.

Nic

Not 100% sure about a possible Switzerland invasion. They were already handling the most part of the money of rich europeans (and not only). To have such a bank next to you is better than risk that all that money will disappear to other locations...
Ciao

Swiss were totally surrounded and isolated so he probably would have left them alone as long as the defector rate stayed low. Sweden had a lot of natural resources I think he would have tried to "anschluss" them without war